[rfc-i] [IAB Trac] #266: Requirement for "Clear Printing"
"Martin J. Dürst"
duerst at it.aoyama.ac.jp
Fri Feb 15 23:01:15 PST 2013
On 2013/02/16 4:10, RJ Atkinson wrote:
> I have no objection to including other formats
> with different column limits (or other formats
> with no column limit).
If you allow other formats, but have to tell everybody who is working
on/with that document to use the one specifically paginated format, in
order for the page numbers to match, that doesn't seem to get us very far.
It seem much easier to tell everybody to use section(/paragraph)
numbers. That has worked extremely well for other standards
organizations (e.g. W3C) for more than a decade.
> A limitation that is specific to one of several possible
> formats (i.e. my proposal) is (by definition) NOT a limitation
> to the other possible formats.
>> Because you mixed two proposals:
>> (a) using the historical number of columns and rows
>> and (b) have a text/plain output that is paginated.
> As I described earlier, those are not independent concepts.
> Neither ASCII, nor ISO-8859-X, nor ISO-10646 (which
> underlies "UTF-8") have the concept of fonts. They
> just have character encodings.
> rfc-interest mailing list
> rfc-interest at rfc-editor.org
More information about the rfc-interest